Case Results

FINRA ARBITRATION NUMBER 16-00715

Puerto Rico Investors v. UBS Financial Services, Inc. and UBS Financial Services of Puerto Rico, Inc.

Erez Law represented four families and a corporation owned by the four families that sustained significant losses primarily in Puerto Rico bonds and in UBS proprietary closed-end funds to a lesser extent. The final hearing lasted 13 days. Ramon “Cholo” Almonte was the UBS financial advisor. The Claimants alleged that UBS recommended an unsuitable and over-concentrated investment in high risk Puerto Rico bonds and funds. The FINRA panel awarded $4,2000,000 as well as costs in an amount of no less than $85,847. The Award is significant in that it represents nearly 100% of the investors’ capital losses and is significantly in excess of the net-out-pocket losses.

View Award

SETTLEMENT

$4,035,000 recovered for four retired NFL football players against brokerage firm

Erez Law recovered $4,035,000 in 2019 against a brokerage firm for four retired NFL football players. The claims were based on unsuitable recommendations to invest in ETFs, inverse ETFs and leveraged ETFs as well as recommendations to concentrate in investments in the mining sector. The settlement is notable for the high percentage of losses recovered in the investments at issue in the case.

SETTLEMENT

$4,000,000 recovered for Ponzi scheme victims against clearing firm

Erez Law recovered $4 million in 2021 from a major brokerage firm for dozens of foreign investors. The claims were based on the brokerage firm acting as a clearing firm for an off-shore unregistered brokerage firm that was running a Ponzi scheme by selling fraudulent proprietary notes. Erez Law brought claims for negligence, breach of contract, and fraud amongst other claims related to the clearing firm’s failure to perform adequate due diligence on the introducing firm and for mispricing the Ponzi scheme related notes. The settlement is notable for its size and the significant recovery for a clearing firm claim.

SETTLEMENT

$3,900,000 recovery for an octogenarian retiree alleging fraud

$3,900,000 recovery for an octogenarian retiree alleging fraud, undue influence by the broker in accepting gifts and inserting themself in the client’s estate planning, and failure to timely hedge a large stock position.

Case no. 20-03856

John Oren and Elise Oren v UBS Financial Services, Inc.

Erez Law represented John and Elise Oren against UBS and recovered $3.8M. The case stems from the sale by UBS to the Orens of its proprietary YES investment strategy. UBS promoted and marketed YES as a low-risk options overlay strategy that would generate additional income. In fact, YES was a high-risk, directional and aggressive iron condor strategy that failed. The award is significant because the arbitrators awarded the Orens their losses of $2 million in addition to the return that was represented they would receive called benefit of the bargain damages as well as prejudgment interest. The panel also found a violation of the Texas Securities Act and awarded attorney’s fees of $965,657 as well. The trial lasted eight days and took place in Houston, Texas.

View Award

SETTLEMENT

Recovered $3.5 million from a major brokerage firm

Recovered $3.5 million from a major brokerage firm for clients who lost money investing in a proprietary options strategy. The settlement amount represented a very high percentage of the clients’ losses. Erez Law brought claims based upon the unsuitability of the investment, misrepresentations and failure to make adequate disclosures, amongst other things. The case was filed with FINRA Dispute Resolution and was settled very close to the start of the trial date.

CASE NO. 17-01908

Isabel Litovich-Quintana and Jose A. Torres v. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, LLC d/b/a Morgan Stanley

Isabel Litovich-Quintana and Jose A. Torres v. Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, LLC d/b/a Morgan Stanley Erez Law represented a Puerto Rican married couple that sustained significant losses in Puerto Rico focused closed-end funds, Puerto Rico bonds and a junk bond. The investors were customers of Angel Aquino who was employed at Morgan Stanley as a financial advisor. The Erez Law clients alleged that Morgan Stanley recommended an over-concentrated and unsuitable investment in Puerto Rico funds and bonds as well as in a junk bond issued by Harrah’s. Morgan Stanley denied the allegations. The final hearing lasted 19 days. During the final hearing, there was testimony and evidence that Morgan Stanley obstructed the investors’ efforts to sell their Puerto Rico funds. The Award is noteworthy in that the total amount awarded exceeds the requested damages and that the panel awarded $3,000,000 of the amount awarded as sanctions for Morgan Stanley’s “noncompliance with the Panel’s Orders” as it relates to orders that required Morgan Stanley to produce documents relating to the financial advisor’s termination of employment. On December 10, 2020, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the Award and denied Morgan Stanley’s appeal to vacate the Award.

View Award | US Court Of Appeals Decision of Dec 10 2020

SETTLEMENT

Recovered $3.2 million from a major brokerage firm

Recovered $3.2 million from a major brokerage firm for clients who lost money investing in a proprietary options strategy. The settlement amount represented a very high percentage of the clients’ losses. Erez Law brought claims based upon the unsuitability of the investment, misrepresentations and failure to make adequate disclosures, amongst other things. The case was filed with FINRA Dispute Resolution and was settled very close to the start of the trial date.

SETTLEMENT

$3,200,000 recovery for investors

$3,200,000 recovery for investors in variable annuity products.

SETTLEMENT

Recovered $3 million from a major brokerage firm

Recovered $3 million from a major brokerage firm for clients who lost money in Puerto Rico bonds and Puerto Rico focused closed-end funds. Erez Law brought claims based upon the unsuitability of the investments, misrepresentations and failure to make adequate disclosures, amongst other things. The case was filed with FINRA Dispute Resolution and was settled very close to the start of the trial date.